SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Neurosurgery / 2017 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 6

Comparison of Stabilization and Fusion Methods with Xenograft Plate Screws After Anterior Lumbar Corpectomy in Dogs

Kaya AKSOY
Suat BOYACI
Murat ULUTAŞ
Bunyamin CALISIR
Pages
975–990
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONClUSION: Xenograft plate screws and metal plate screws provide equivalent fusion and stabilization in anterior lumbar stabilization

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:AIm: Fusion development is the primary goal in spinal surgeries that are conducted for the treatment of vertebral body pathologies such as trauma, tumor and infection.
📊
Key Findings & Data:We evaluated fusion development in stabilizations that were carried out with xenograft (XG) with XG plate-screw (XPS) and XG with metal plate-screw (MPS) systems in dogs’ lumbar vertebrae (L5-7 segment) in terms of radiological, biomechanical and histopathological aspects. mATERIAl and mEThODS: The animals were divided into 4 groups, each including 5 subjects.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONClUSION: Xenograft plate screws and metal plate screws provide equivalent fusion and stabilization in anterior lumbar stabilization
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

AIm: Fusion development is the primary goal in spinal surgeries that are conducted for the treatment of vertebral body pathologies such as trauma, tumor and infection. Stabilization using metal plate screws together either with an autograft, allograft or xenograft is used. We evaluated fusion development in stabilizations that were carried out with xenograft (XG) with XG plate-screw (XPS) and XG with metal plate-screw (MPS) systems in dogs’ lumbar vertebrae (L5-7 segment) in terms of radiological, biomechanical and histopathological aspects. mATERIAl and mEThODS: The animals were divided into 4 groups, each including 5 subjects. The experiment consisted of Control group 1 which did not go through any procedure and was stabilized, Control group 2 which underwent instability with only L6 anterior corpectomy, Experimental group 1 which was stabilized with intervertebral XG and XPS after L6 corpectomy, and Experimental group 2 which was stabilized with intervertebral XG and MPS after L6 corpectomy. Development of fusion in the Experimental groups 1 and 2 was evaluated in terms of radiological and histopathological aspects. RESUlTS: Comparison of Control and Experimental groups showed an increase in resistance in all activities on biomechanical tests (p 0.05). CONClUSION: Xenograft plate screws and metal plate screws provide equivalent fusion and stabilization in anterior lumbar stabilization

🔖

Cite This Article

AKSOY, K., BOYACI, S., ULUTAŞ, M., CALISIR, B. (2017). Comparison of Stabilization and Fusion Methods with Xenograft Plate Screws After Anterior Lumbar Corpectomy in Dogs. Turkish Neurosurgery, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 6, 975–990. https://ajindex.com/articles/405363

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Brantigan JW: Pseudarthrosis rate after allograft posterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw and plate fixation. Spine 19:1271-1279; discussion 1280, 1994 2. Brantigan JW, McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Wang H, Orbegoso CM: Interbody lumbar fusion using a carbon fiber cage implant versus allograft bone: An investigational study in the Spanish Goat. Spine 19:1436-1443, 1994 3. Buck B, Malinin TI, Brown MD: Bone transplantation and human immunodeficiency virus: An estimate of risk of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Clin Orthop Relat Res 240:129-136, 1989 4. Chang-Jung C, Yi-Jie K, Yueh-Feng C, Rau G, Yang-Hwei T: Anterior cervical fusion using a polyetheretherketone cage containing a bovine xenograft: Three to five-year follow-up. Spine 33:2524-2428, 2008 5. Chou D, Larios AE, Chamberlain RH, Fifield MS, Hartl R, Dickman CA, Sonntag VK, Crawford NR: A biomechanical comparison of three anterior thoracolumbar implants after corpectomy: Are two screws better than one? J Neurosurg Spine 4:213-218, 2006 6. Closkey RF, Parsons JR, Lee CK, Blacksin MF, Zimmermant MC: Mechanics of interbody spinal fusion: Analysis of critical bone graft area. Spine 18:1011-1015, 1993 7. Espersen J, Buhl M, Eriksen E, Fode K, Klaerke A, Krøyer L, Lindeberg H, Madsen C, Strange P, Wohlert L: Treatment of cervical disc disease using Cloward’s technique. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 70:97-114, 1984 8. Frank EH, Gong X, Sipe RV, Buck DC, Hollinger JO: Transverse process fusion with bovine anorganic bone. J Biomed Mater Res 60:118-125, 2002 9. Goran A, Murthy KK: Fracture dislocation of the cervical spine: Value of anterior approach with bovine bone interbody fusion. Spine 3:95-102, 1978 10. Helm GA, Dayoub H, Jane Jr JA: Bone graft substitutes for the promotion of spinal arthrodesis. Neurosurg Focus 10:1-5, 2001 11. Hitchon PW, Goel VK, Rogge T, Grosland NM, Sairyo K, Torner J: Biomechanical studies of a dynamized anterior thoracolumbar implant. Spine 25:306-309, 2000 12. Humphries A, Hawk W: Anterior fusion of the lumbar spine using an internal fixative device. Surg Forum 9: 770-773, 1958 13. Jorgenson SS, Lowe TG, France J, Sabin J: A prospective analysis of autograft versus allograft in posterolateral lumbar fusion in the same patient: A minimum of 1-year follow-up in 144 patients. Spine 19:2048-2052, 1994 14. Kowalski RJ, Ferrara LA, Benzel EC: Biomechanics of bone fusion. Neurosurg Focus 10:1-7, 2001 15. Kozak JA, Heilman AE, O’Brien JP: Anterior lumbar fusion options te